theacademic use pagestates very plainly: "Wikipedia is not considered a credible source." An article about thereliability of Wikipediaalso contains a number of quotes from librarians, professors, and researchers saying that Wikipedia is not a reliable source of accurate information...
“Wikipedia is not a reliable source…. As a user-generated source, it can be edited by anyone at any time, and any information it contains at a particular time could be vandalism, a work in progress, or simply incorrect.” –Wikipedia Wikipedia is an open-source encyclopedia. This means ...
Indeed, a 2005 report in the journal Nature found it to be only slightly less reliable (可靠的) than Encyclopedia Britannica.【5】It does not rely on advertising. Instead, all of its funds (资金) come from donations. Perhaps more importantly, the number of its volunteer editors is shrinking...
errors, although the organization has a content review system that works to fix this problem. Several studies have concluded that Wikipedia is as accurate as most print encyclopedias. Indeed, a 2005 report in the journal Nature found it to be only slightly less reliable than Encyclopedia ...
Indeed, a 2005 report in thejournal Nature found it to be only slightly less reliable than Encyclopedia Britannica.Today Wikipedia faces many challenges. It does not rely on advertising. 40Perhaps more importantly, the number of its volunteer editors is shrinking.Despite these difficulties, Jimmy ...
Not helpful Wikipedia is not a very reliable source, but I downloaded the add-in, and it never works! Like… Bro. Mark as helpful (0) Comments (0) Report review Sun, May 17, 2020Edited A Anonymous Marketplace review Español Estaría muy bien que los resultados estuvieran en...
why the content is mostly reliable is probably that these terms are rather mainstream.The high-school level content is less likely to be wrong than the subjects studied in graduate schools. So when primary and secondary students are researching history, Wikipedia is still a proper place to start...
___,a 2005 report in the journal Nature found it to be only ___ less reliable than the Encyclopedia Britannica. Jimmy Wales has big plans for the future. He wants Wikipedia in every language of the world and hopes the number of visitors will reach 1 billion by 2015. There is no doubt...
Despite its undeserved reputation for reliability, Wikipedia itselfsays:“Wikipedia is not a reliable source. Wikipedia can be edited by anyone at any time. This means that any information it contains at any particular time could be vandalism, a work in progress, or just plain wrong.” ...
Yet despite a string of notable embarrassments—and its own disclaimer that “Wikipedia is not a reliable source”—it is, on the whole, fairly accurate. An investigation by Nature in 2005 compared the site with “Britannica”, and found little difference in the number of errors that experts ...